Prism Orpheus vs. Steinberg MR 816X Loopback Test

[gtr123]

I recently purchased a Steinberg MR 816 X to see how it would perform against my Prism Orpheus that I have been using for the past year and a half. After receiving my Steinberg unit I ran a number of tests with each unit. One of the tests was a simple loopback test, running a mix out of the D/A and back into the A/D of the same unit, each on there own internal clock. I proceeded to do a blind ABX test to see if I could determine which was which. I was never able to distinguish accurately better than 50% which equates to at best a guess, between the two units. It was quite an eye-opener. I am going to post the two loopback files along with the original for others to try and distinguish. Very curious to see if others can tell which is which.

Original File

Converter A

Converter B

[chris_m]

Thanks for posting, these 2 files are difficult to ABX in foobar, i also came out 50/50. The differences are even smaller than Robins last comparison here: A/D Converter Shootout (with samples)

If i had to take a guess i'd say converter b might be the orpheus. The piano appears to have a little fuller body and a tiny bit more impact.

[Fhl]

Thanks for posting!
If I had to guess I'd go with A, but it's 50/50. I'd say the price do not justify the result.
My opinion

[Jack Luminous]

Interesting !

[gtr123]

Thanks for listening everyone.

I also found the results very interesting. I will let others chime in before I reveal the results. I also did some tests with the built in mic pre's of the Steinberg unit and they are excellent also.

[Sean0313]

I think B is Orpheus......

[tdr]

I voted for A because I think I hear more heighs, especially on the piano. In comparison, B sounds a tad dull. But in general the two are really close, hard to belive given the price tag.
I would like to hear a second example though, something with more transienst, a modern rock tune with a heavy hitting snare and walls of guitars. If the difference is still neglectable, a converter upgrade will be removed from my wish list.

[Slogun]

I went for A as Orpheus. A bit more detail and depth.

[kstackm]

Orpheus = "A" , Steinberg = "B". If the Steinberg sounds as good a "A", I'm selling my Orpheus - LOL !!! Seriously, "A" has more depth of field as if you can hear the "room" the placement of the instruments in the mix field. "B" sound very good, almost to the point of wondering if "B" were clocked by "A" would there be any difference ? What if you clocked the "B " interface to the "A", I wonder what the result would be, that is assuming of course that "A" is indeed the Orpheus ? - - KS

[butterfly]

.............A sounds better here to me and more familiar, B sounded harsher in the mids and less clear in the highs, if I'm wrong I'm not going to sell my Orpheus but I might eat something..........don't have a hat but......I'll think of something.

[Silver Sonya]

It's funny that I'm listening to this test on an Orpheus.

A sounds better, but it could also be louder.

Also, Joshua Judges Ruth is a masterpiece.

That is all.

- c

[rackdude]

I hope the MR816 is A

[inthere]

Originally Posted by gtr123

I was never able to distinguish accurately better than 50% which equates to at best a guess, between the two units. It was quite an eye-opener.

You'll rarely get better than 50% on that test. Where you would hear a difference is on songs you've recorded and mixed on the different interfaces. As the track count grows, the differences in sound quality are easier to hear. Your eyes were opened, but you were still blindfolded

[gtr123]

Originally Posted by inthere

You'll rarely get better than 50% on that test. Where you would hear a difference is on songs you've recorded and mixed on the different interfaces. As the track count grows, the differences in sound quality are easier to hear. Your eyes were opened, but you were still blindfolded

Actually I worked with the Prism Orpheus extensively for about a year and a half. Since I have purchased the Steinberg MR I have been using it and I can honestly say if I didn't know I was using the Steinberg I wouldn't be able to tell you which interface I was using. That goes for mixing and tracking. It is every bit as great to work with as the Orpheus was and integrates every so nicely with Cubase 5 :-)

Not to start and argument, but in my humble opinion, I disagree with the whole stacking principle in general. I have noticed with the Steinberg that as track counts have grown, it is every bit as great sounding as the Orpheus was. Again, just my opinion :-)

[gtr123]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

It's funny that I'm listening to this test on an Orpheus.

A sounds better, but it could also be louder.

Also, Joshua Judges Ruth is a masterpiece.

That is all.

- c

I matched levels as closely as I could. My whole purpose for this test was to do a blind ABX test. For that purpose of an ABX test, if there is a slight volume difference that would only help the listener to be able to determine which file is which. Something I could never do accurately.

And YES Joshua Judges Ruth is a masterpiece :-)

[gtr123]

I'll let some more people chime in and vote before revealing the results.

[Rep]

A is seams more volume matched with the original with some of the same sharpness, perhaps a thinner bottom and top-end not as open.
B seams more prominent or louder with the mids coming forward more in a pleasing way and a better top end.

A is like a Chinese Mic , just trying to confuse you with the brightness , pretending that it is better
B has better dimension ... multi takes with this, and working with this from the get go would yeld Even better end results.

[Erik Thomas]

Converter B is not bad, and is at the top of the line....for pro-sumer gear.

Converter A has a much more open sound, better stereo imaging, you can actually hear the depth in the mix, and the beater on the piano... very very nice....adds so much to the music.

Converter A has to be the Prism. An entire song tracked and mixed on each converter would show even more of a cumulative difference.

[chris_m]

Originally Posted by Erik Thomas

Converter B is not bad, and is at the top of the line....for pro-sumer gear.

Converter A has a much more open sound, better stereo imaging, you can actually hear the depth in the mix, and the beater on the piano... very very nice....adds so much to the music.

Converter A has to be the Prism. An entire song tracked and mixed on each converter would show even more of a cumulative difference.

I couldnt hear the differences you said, not on my headphone setup nor on my K+H O300 or the Opals i currently have here. Did you test them blindly via ABX in foobar for example? Just listening to the clips i also thought i could hear those differences you mentioned, but using ABX i failed horribly.

[ohmsweetohm]

I won't have my speakers available until wednesday, but I can say that I instantly experienced a huge difference in D/A quality between the 816 and the FF800. Not an Orhpeus I know, but it was not a subtle difference. MUCH tighter image! Much easier to mix on.

It's a crying shame that you can't bypass the pres for balanced line inputs.

[Erik Thomas]

Originally Posted by chris_m

I couldnt hear the differences you said, not on my headphone setup nor on my K+H O300 or the Opals i currently have here. Did you test them blindly via ABX in foobar for example? Just listening to the clips i also thought i could hear those differences you mentioned, but using ABX i failed horribly.

I tested them totally blind and then referenced them to the original, and then back again over and over before posting my comments. I found that what I feel about converter A, held true throughout...and also converter B as well.
Im just trying to listen 'through' the music and focus on imaging rather than specific frequencies. This doesnt mean that Im 'right' or anything like that...but I do hear difference between the tracks and also compared to the original. I didnt use ABX, just the tracks posted here back to back and back again via headphones. Imaging to me, shows up better on headphones. The Steinberg did admirably well, and the gap between the two is not that large when the cost is factored in....however there is a significant difference overall.

a complete tracking session between the 2 converters would be interesting to hear....

[djanogil]

Originally Posted by gtr123

One of the tests was a simple loopback test, running a mix out of the D/A and back into the A/D of the same unit, each on there own internal clock.

Ok but a test like that won't reveal much, to make a real comparison, you need to record a project on several tracks, using exactly the same signal chain, and sending the same signal to both converters at the same time using a signal splitter.
That way you really hear how the AD sounds on every track.

I understand it is a complicate thing to do as you 'd need two computers running the same DAW.

Alternatively you could record the same piece of music twice using the exact same settings with both interfaces.

[Dove]

When will you reveal the results? If sample A isn't the Orpheus I will be amazed.

I would also like to here a similar A-B between the Orpheus and the Aurora to see if the imaging and definition are similar or quite different as in your samples.


If Sample B is the orpheus there will be a bit of shock and awe in this thread and perhaps some defending going on.

[borhythm]

Great Post! i agree whith Erik and also listened to the samples w/ foobar and could hear a clarity and smoothness in ConverterA which didn´t exist in ConverterB(just listen carefully when the piano comes in - really smooth detailed sound), so i guess Converter A is the Prism Orpheus, but i´m still hoping it is not as i´m on the verge of buying the MR816X, looking forward to the revelation of results...

[Transistor]

I thought B was grainy. If that's the Orpheus I'll blame the OP for botching the test

(Listened out of studio on a laptop through Ultrasone hfi700s + MAudio Transit. I can always blame the MAudio if all else fails...)

r,
j,

[haryy]

I hear better clarity in A so i believe its the Prism. Difference is clear on my computer speakers.

I hope it's the Steinberg though, but i doubt this is the case.

[Friedemann]

At first I had 50/50 on foobar but then I found out what to listen for carefully and I got a pretty high score. A has more depth although both sound rather good. I did not compare to the original. I was only listening to the differences between both converters and I preferred A slightly.
I´m curious which is which because I know the Yamaha is very good, but I never listened to the orpheus. Maybe I don´t need to

[andyspiller]

Originally Posted by Silver Sonya

Also, Joshua Judges Ruth is a masterpiece.

That is all.

- c

[gtr123]

Some interesting comments. How long should I wait to reveal the results? How many votes?

[Lemonsqueezer]

1 week thumbsup